Another week in review

Wow, times flies when you don't have anything to blog about. Or, more accurately, when you're sidelined with what the sports world calls "flu-like symptoms".

Now I'm feeling great, thanks to some rest, my mom, and the culinary brilliance of Chili's To Go. What did I miss?

1. The Final Four were chosen. Called out from among mere men, the Final Four rose forth, shaking the Earth in their illustrious...sorry. I mean, I really have been inside too long.

Florida. Georgetown. Ohio State. UCLA. Who had them picked? I didn't, but it's not hard to imagine that thousands of fans did. Georgetown is the closest to being a surprise, but even they were a No. 2 seed in an up-for-grabs regional. John, go ahead and tell us you had Georgetown making it this far. Seriously. We're dying to know. (As you can see, I'm not bitter at all. Actually, I'm...well, I'll get to that at No. 2. Suffice it to say I have still never won an NCAA tournment contest of any kind.)

I think the lineup of teams is interesting, but I don't think it's too meaningful either way. My first post on this blog was about how sick I was of hearing about Cinderella teams, many of whom lose big after that inspiring two-game winning streak into the Sweet Sixteen. In a way, it's nice to see great teams taking every spot. Hopefully, it means there are three great games left to go.

Of course, the novelty of an unknown on the national stage is a nice thing too. Is it going away? The pessimist could argue that the new professional age limit is really only going to help major programs, who can now feature players that in years past would have already been in the NBA. I don't think this is true now, but it's possible.

I'm just glad college basketball lets the small schools play on the same floor as the big ones. They could just scrap the tournament altogether and let the most-hyped squads play in exhibitions two months after the season, you know.

2. Actually, I'm...(cont.) not that upset about North Carolina's tourney loss. Maybe I'm getting soft. Maybe it's that they won it all so recently, and the shot at another title so soon felt like a gift anyway. Or maybe the Tar Heels just completely fell apart and have no one to blame but themselves.

Georgetown dominated them down the stretch, and the Tar Heels were happy to play along, taking horrible shots and ignoring their post men in the halfcourt. They choked, but they probably weren't really contenders to begin with. Like the 2005-06 Broncos, I got too excited, but the titles would have been a little unexpected anyway. They didn't lose on a bad call or anything. I can live with that.

The part about it that really bothered me was a trash-talking phone call from a friend who recently became an N.C. State fan. (Don't ask me why.) Something about how the Tar Heels always fold under pressure, especially Tyler Hansbrough, who was only the game's leading scorer with 26 points and matched Hoya Roy "Julius" Hibbert's game-high 11 boards. Hansbrough's not my favorite player or anything, but geez, what do you want from him?

You're right, though, it's not as good as finishing tenth in a 12-team conference or nabbing that 6 seed in the NIT.

3. Broncos sign Dre Bly. Man, this post is getting long. So the Broncos signed Dre Bly to a seemingly reasonable five-year, $33 million deal. (By the way, the linked article is incredibly short, but I'm hopeful the Denver Post will fix it overnight before you read this.)

Is the NFL's free agency spending spree over? I don't know. I can't make sense of the deals under the new cap. $33 million still sounds like a ton of money for a No. 2 corner. But I'm glad he's signed, happy the distraction's gone, and I'm looking forward to seeing what a gambler can do opposite a Champ.

That's a lot of money for a backup

Holy crap.

Matt Schaub, who spent the first three years of his NFL career as a backup to Mike Vick in Atlanta, just signed a six-year, $48,000,000 deal with the Houston Texans, according to ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli, who did use quotes this time.

Schaub was acquired by the Texans in a trade with the Falcons, who received some draft picks. Thus spake Pasquathustra:

As for the Falcons, the trade allows the cap-strapped team to essentially recoup the $2.3 million qualifying offer it made to Schaub and invest that money elsewhere. And the haul the team received in the trade -- a swap of first-round choices in 2007 and second-round picks in the 2007 and 2008 drafts -- provides Atlanta with considerable flexibility.

So, in other words, good move for Atlanta, a team already set at the quarterback position. They picked up some good draft choices for a backup who didn't play much anyway. What's even better is that, by giving the Texans Schaub as a new starting quarterback, the Falcons nearly guaranteed themselves that the 2008 pick they receive will be near the top of the second round.

This is one of the most unbelieveable contracts in the history of Hole Punch Sports, and that's saying something. Schaub, according to the article, will earn $20 million over the next three years before an absurd bonus of $10 million is due, which he will obviously never get. Wait, that's not the whole story. To be fair, I think Mr. Pasquarelli did a fine job on this article:

After the first three years, the Texans must pay Schaub a $10 million option bonus in March 2010 to trigger the final three seasons of the contract, or he becomes a free agent. This is the same Houston team, though, that paid the soon-to-be-discarded David Carr a "buy back" bonus of $8 million last spring to reinstate three years of his contract that had voided.

How about that? So, about this Schaub guy. He's gotten some coverage over the years because he's been Vick's backup, and people assume he couldn't be worse in the pocket than that athletic lefty. Well, Schaub's a career 52.2-percent passer, and he's got a career quarterback rating just under 70. Both of those numbers are actually worse than Vick's. Not much worse, mind you, but still worse.

David Carr, while he hasn't lived up to No. 1 pick expectations, is better than Schaub. His stats aren't superb-he's a 60-percent guy, with a rating of 75.5-but he's never backed down from the vicious and relentless poundings he's endured over the years. At least he's shown guts, while Schaub has shown nothing, so far.

This contract, though, clearly means Carr is out and Schaub is in as the starter. Who knows? Schaub could turn into an All-Pro in Houston, and this could become the best move the Texans ever made. But couldn't the Texans wait for him to prove that potential, at least a little bit, before they hand him $48 million?

Anyone care to explain this?

Copyright, the NFL, and YouTube

You pander to one reader, you've got to pander to the other.

And so my attention turns to a potential copyright violation by the NFL. If you haven't heard, a law professor named Wendy Seltzer posted a video clip of the copyright notice that aired at the end of the Super Bowl on YouTube. The NFL said, "Hey! Copying our copyright notice is copyright infringement!" and sent YouTube a notice to take it down. YouTube took it down.

Since she's a law professor, and this was intended for educational purposes, Seltzer figured it was fair use, and counter-notified YouTube. (The blog article where I first saw this link to her blog several times, and you can find more/better details there.) The NFL again asked YouTube to take it down, ignoring the fair use notice. Seltzer argues that, under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, that the NFL's request was, itself, illegal.

That's pretty much the whole story. It's not big news so much as it is cute, but it'd be funny if the NFL got in some kind of legal trouble for this.

I also like it because its goes along well with some things I've read lately. Basically, I think copyright law, and especially the DMCA (I like the term "Domination by Media Corporations Act"), goes too far in many cases. It's just nice to see a big company punished for once.

I'm not sure why the NFL and other sports organzations/figures are so bothered by YouTube in the first place. I loved being able to look up Walter Payton highlights or Steve Atwater's hit on Christian Okoye last year. Granted, their No. 1 goal isn't making me happy, but I didn't see the harm considering I'd have a hard time buying that stuff even if I wanted to. I don't know if anyone's read Mark Cuban's blog lately, but the man is definitely losing his mind over YouTube. I don't get it. He got lucky and got rich on the Internet-why does he hate it so much when someone else does the same?

Spring Training Coverage

Pugs asked for it, so I'll attempt to deliver. We'll see how it goes. (In all seriousness, though, suggestions for posts/topics are always welcome and even encouraged.)

I just read a Denver Post article about roster decisions facing the Colorado Rockies. Predictably, it was the most depressing thing I've seen all year. See for yourself. Let's look at some choice nuggets:

With his bulldog nature, Josh Fogg seems a safer bet to keep on staff than the talented but erratic Byung-Hyun Kim. Fogg might not have dynamic stuff, but he has double-digit wins in four of his five big-league seasons.

Byung-Hyun Kim, huh. Byung-Hyun Kim? Kim's best known for his "performance" in the 2001 World Series, during which he surrendered game-winning home runs in back-to-back games. Not entirely his fault—most managers don't leave their closers in for 61 pitches, watch them fall apart, then put them in the next night—but it's no surprise a player associated with losing would end up on the Rockies. In fact, he's been with the club the last two seasons, going 5-12 in 2005 and 8-12 last year. That 8-12 record is almost too good, actually.

The Rockies are exploring trades for both pitchers, with Baltimore keeping its eye on Fogg and Oakland expressing interest in Kim.Awild-card possibility could be Los Angeles Dodgers left-hander Mark Hendrickson.

I'm probably the only person who remembers Hendrickson's brief stint as a washout with the 76ers. (Apparently not.) He was awful, and this was back when the Sixers sucked. Okay, the Sixers suck now, but you know what I mean. This was back when they had Iverson and Jerry Stackhouse on the same team. Anyway, I'm not sure I get the appeal of Hendrickson. I also don't know why the Denver Post thinks "Kim.Awild-card" is one word. Moving on to shortstop...

Clint Barmes and rookie Troy Tulowitzki were supposed to stage a battle royal for the starting job, but Tulowitzki won easily as Barmes struggled at the plate.

Wow, that guy fell off in a hurry. No, not the writer or web-poster who said "Kim.Awild-card" and followed it up with the dreaded "battle royal." Good guess, though. I'm talking about Clint Barmes, whose career derailed after his rookie-year injury, which I think he got carrying meat upstairs. For the record, Barmes—who some might say plays in a hitter-friendly park—hit .220/.264/.335 last year in 131 games. (That's batting average/on-base percentage/slugging percentage.) That might be okay if you're Neifi Perez in the field, but the Rockies expect some offense from Barmes. And Perez was better than that in Denver, anyway.

At age 42, Steve Finley is certain he still has the skills to be an everyday player, but the starting job belongs to speedster Willy Taveras.

Steve Finley? Who's our catcher, Josh Gibson? No...

Rookie Chris Iannetta developed faster than anyone expected, and he has moved past Yorvit Torrealba for the starting job. But Iannetta s inexperience means Torrealba will catch two or three games a week.

That's a great solution for inexperience: don't let the guy play. This is ridiculous. I'm just going to go ball up and cry for a while.

Shoot. (It's tournament time!)

I know almost nothing about college basketball this year. So my bracket will probably win my family's tourney challenge for once! Har de har, ain't that always the truth.

I was going to leave it at that, and let y'all have at it in the comments, but I think I need to say something. College hoops have been on pretty much every time I turned on my TV, so I've probably seen a little more college basketball this year than I have in the past. I just haven't seen the right teams. Anyway, here goes:

- All hail North Carolina! Since they're a No. 1 seed and my favorite team, they're the clear Hole Punch pick for the national championship, even though I'm a little surprised they're a top seed.

- I look forward to Kansas becoming the first No. 1 seed to lose in the first round.

- Remember when people said Duke was on the bubble? Now they're a 6th seed, which isn't bubble-level at all. Remember, kids: if you're in a major-enough conference, you only need to be one of the top six or so teams to have a shot at being the absolute best team in the country. That certainly makes sense to me.

- Seriously, just so no one thinks I ran from my earlier predictions: Duke is going home very soon.

- I don't know if I'm supposed to call BYU one of my alma maters-I went there as a freshman but transferred-but as a blogger, I'm contractually obligated to mention they got a No. 8 seed. Yeah, baby! You don't mess with the Cougars! Actually, messing with them is the blueprint for destroying a BYU team in any sport-just be a little physical. This is why the championships they factored in around the time I studied there were volleyball and cross country.

- The play-in game is a really stupid idea.

- This is bad, but...I look forward to seeing Kevin Durant in extended action for the first time. (And I call myself a basketball fan.) Texas is a No. 4 seed, so they should make it to the Sweet Sixteen, I guess. If Texas loses in the first round or two, though, I wouldn't read too much into it. Being the best player on the floor doesn't have as big of an impact on winning in college basketball as it does in the NBA. Yes, I remember Dwyane Wade taking an unsung Marquette team to the Final Four, but I also remember Tim Duncan's Wake Forest squads doing minimal tournament damage.

- Texas A&M has the highest seed (No. 3) of my family's teams (Texas and BYU are the others), so congrats to them. They also have the best team and should advance the deepest. In other words, only Dave should feel humiliated if his team loses first. (Also, bro, congratulations!)

- Props to the team at SI.com, which thankfully noted "All Times Eastern" on the pdf bracket I just printed out. There are no times listed on the bracket.

Broncos sign Pat Ramsey

That's funny, just the other day I was wondering what ever happened to former Redskins quarterback Patrick Ramsey. I didn't wonder enough to find out, but I guess I will now. The Broncos just signed Ramsey to a two-year contract worth $5 million.

Considering how this offseason has gone, that is a terrific value. What does Ramsey bring to the table? Statistically, you'd be tempted to say, "not much". He likes to throw short (career 6.6 yards per attempt) but still can't connect on very many passes (55.7 career completion percentage). A quarterback who can't throw is worrisome.

But he was thrown in the fire as a young player, and showed some improvement over time. Honestly, I didn't see him play much, but I do remember hearing his toughness praised, which is cool.

He'll make a solid backup quarterback, and I'm glad the Broncos made that a priority. Don't get me wrong. Jay Cutler & Pat "sy" Ramsey are a downgrade from Jake Plummer & Cutler, for sure. But none of that's Ramsey's fault, and now at least we're not hopeless if Cutler falters or gets injured.

As a side note, I just love Len Pasquarelli's stories. That man is flat-out paid by the word. Not by the interview, though.

Blessed with a strong arm and solid pocket presence, Ramsey has suffered from being overcoached at times and, certainly during his tenure under coach Joe Gibbs in Washington, he was mishandled and lost confidence.

What? When I was in journalism school, they told us we had to use quotes if we wanted to say stuff like that. You can't just throw your opinion in the middle of a news story like that. I guess if it's true and well-known, you could just come out and say it...but I didn't know with certainty that Ramsey was "mishandled".

The Broncos will be Ramsey's third team in three seasons, but one of the reasons he settled on Denver as his new home is the overall stability of the organization and the chance to settle in with a franchise and coaching staff he respects.

Okay, there is no possible way Pasquarelli knew that without talking to somebody, right? Is he ashamed of the conversation of some reason? Pasquarelli churns out an obscene amount of material for ESPN.com, and it'd be possible to say he forgot to use a quote, but he does that all the time. I'm not really half as bitter as I'm making myself sound right now. I just think it's funny.

Broncos get Daniel Graham

The Broncos signed tight end Daniel Graham, formerly of the New England Patriots and a one-time University of Colorado star, to a five-year, $30 million contract with $15 million in guarantees.

The length of the deal is kind of a funny conicidence, because five years is exactly how long it's been since I would have cared that the Broncos acquired Graham.

Admittedly, I'm excited. The first time I saw Graham play live, my brother ("John" in the comments) told me to keep an eye on him. Glad I did. He was incredible! Not only was Graham one of CU's finest blockers (back then, that meant something), he was easily its most clutch receiver. I left that game knowing he'd be a star.

As a pro, Graham has 1,393 receiving yards. That's not last year. Not in his best year. But in his entire five-year career. What happened? I don't really know. He had some problems with drops for a while, but he just never became a central part of the Patriots' offense. Instead, guys like Deion Branch emerged as Tom Brady's favored targets. (Graham won some nice jewelry with New England, so I doubt he's too upset about how life turned out.)

As anyone watching Tony Scheffler last year learned, the Broncos will never hesitate to throw to a tight end, no matter how many passes he drops. Graham could end up a pretty good pick-up; I just can't believe the money everyone is throwing around.

Some historical persepctive: After the 1999 season, the Broncos let the game's premier tight end, Shannon Sharpe, go to the Ravens. Sharpe was returning from a broken collarbone suffered the season before, but he'd also squabbled with the team over money for a few years. The Ravens landed Sharpe for a four-year, $13.8 million deal that had a $4.5 million signing bonus. (I got those numbers from Pro Football Weekly.) Sharpe lasted only two years in Baltimore before being cut for salary-cap reasons. It's been seven years, but Graham making that much more than Sharpe is insane.

Catching up

You guys rock. I want to talk about a few things mentioned in the comments, in case anyone missed them.

1. Travis Henry signs with Denver (John mentioned this). Already said what I want to say, and it's a great move.

2. Joey Porter signs with Miami for $20 million guaranteed (John). Porter's a very good linebacker, but he made the jump to superstar last year solely on the basis of personality. That's incredibly annoying.

Why would someone who craves the spotlight would be in such a hurry to sign with Miami? They're fast becoming one of the most irrelevant teams in the league, in my opinion. It's cute, though, that an NFL team features adult males named "Joey" on both sides of the ball.

3. George Karl threatening to bench Carmelo, which "The Goreman" saw mentioned on PTI. You can find Karl's words, sadly, in a Mark Kiszla column. (I know you guys aren't Woody Paige fans, but Kiszla is one hundred times worse.)

This is good and this is bad, and it's easy to see both sides. It's true, Carmelo is not playing as well as he can, but that goes for other Nuggets, too. Carmelo is perhaps being made a scapegoat. As the team's star, he gets the lion's share of the credit when they win. Being the scapegoat when it's going poorly is just part of the territory. It looks to me like the coach is trying to deflect blame from himself. But as an outsider, I can't tell if Carmelo's really blowing him off or if Karl is going back to the media games he played at his last coaching stops.

While Carmelo does look for his own shot a lot, and isn't well-rounded at all, there's no question the Nuggets would be worse if Karl actually followed through on his threats and benched him. It'd just be too big of a hole in the lineup. Certainly Allen Iverson can fill the role of go-to guy, but the Nuggets weren't very good when 'Melo was suspended, so that's not a real solution. I just hope this works, and lights a fire under the team, rather than making it all worse.

So far, so good. Carmelo had 21 points, seven rebounds, and six assists last night as the Nuggets beat the Hornets 106-91. (You really have to see the lede to the Denver Post's game story to believe it.) The Nuggets play tonight at Golden State.

Weekend basketball

Watched some basketball this weekend, and here's what I noticed:

1. I caught part of the Houston Rockets at Denver Nuggets game Friday night. The Nuggets' struggles have less to do with chemistry and more to do with a complete lack of discipline and intelligent play.

Allen Iverson still looks for his own shot just a little too often in trasition, it seems, but at least he creates a very good shot for himself. Carmelo is still too willing to take bad shots. Steve Blake is a better fit on the roster than I thought he'd be, but he also clearly belongs in a reserve role. He's willing to hustle and very willing to pass, but he's not an especially skilled passer and, at times, made surprisingly poor decisions on the fast break. (Obviously the trade deadline is past, but the Nuggets have spent years trying to run at altitude without a gifted distributor at the point, which makes no sense.)

Add it all up and you have a team that looks extremely outcoached right now. I don't think firing George Karl would solve all or any of our problems, but I do think his hands-off approach to the offense is starting to backfire. It seemed too many times that guys were pretty much doing whatever they wanted, without any fear of repercussions.

So if you were wondering how a team with Carmelo and AI can be so mediocre, now you know.

2. I saw a bit of Carolina-Duke, but fell asleep before Gerald Henderson's classless* and unconscionable cheap shot on Tyler Hansbrough. (What can I say, I've been sick.) It just pisses me off too much to discuss it. My biggest regret was that it was basketball, not hockey, else I'd know for sure Henderson would get his in the next game. Instead, with Roy Williams and Mike Surechefski on the benches, you know next time's postgame story will be how proud they are of their guys for being mature enough to just play basketball. Oh, and Billy Packer needs to shut up.

3. Duke's never been a very athletic team, of course, but their skill and conditioning are usually second to none. That's how they so often control the tempo. Not so yesterday. It was only one game, but the Blue Devils were worse in transition than any Duke team I've seen in a long time. Forget their RPI-I will be absolutely shocked if Duke does anything in the tournament this year.

4. Carolina's break was relentless. I hope the Nuggets took some notes on how a team really pushes the pace.

* = I typically loathe the "class" argument, which I associate with Utah Jazz fans and other sore losers. And Carolina DID win, and pretty handily. But it's the kind of thing a Duke booster would constantly brag about, which is why I point it out here.

Dré Bly's not so bad after all

In today's comments section I acknowledged that the Broncos would have been wiser to go for free agent cornerback Nate Clements, late of the Buffalo Bills, than to trade for Dré Bly.

I was wrong.

The San Francisco 49ers signed Clements to an eight-year, $80 million contract (warning: bad pun in first sentence of link). As Len Pasquarelli wrote,

By virtually any standard used to assess NFL contracts by those in the industry, the contract makes Clements the highest-paid defensive player in league history.

I'll say. Quickly now, a few things:

• $80 million is a lot of money. It is also much more money than Clements will actually make-there's no way he'll go eight years without renegotiating or being cut. A more telling number is the $22 million he's guaranteed.
• That $22 million or, as I call it, enough cash for two-and-half PlayStation 3s, is still a lot of money.
• Nate Clements did not make last year's Pro Bowl.

Do the best cornerbacks always go to the Pro Bowl? Of course not-but the most famous ones usually do. Call me crazy, but I think historic contracts should go to historic players. That's not always how it works out, but for eighty large large, a player should be an All-Pro and sell tickets. I don't quite see Clements doing that.

I am glad the Broncos didn't commit $22-80 million to a No. 2 corner. (Do you think they knew the price would be that high? No wonder they were so quick to move on Bly!) The 49ers, on the other hand, do nothing but worry me here, though it's nice to see their current regime spending some money for once.

I worry for two reasons. First, nothing can slow a young team's ascent quite like handing a big contract to the wrong guy. I'm not saying Clements is a bad apple; but what if he gets injured? Or what if he plays well, but not much better than he has already? Local fans, consider the Denver Nuggets. Imagine how much better they would be if they hadn't vastly overpaid for the likes of Andre Miller, Kenyon Martin, and Nene. Moves like those separate the Nuggets of the world from the Spurs. (The Nuggets, of course, deserve a post of their own in short order, but that's a whole other depressing story.)

The other reason I worry is the kind of tension this can create on a team. Especially on a young team, where many players are still waiting on their first "real" contract. Hopefully for 49ers fans, it won't be a problem, but it very well could be on some level, even if it's the kind of thing the public never hears about.

Plummer to the Bucs?

The Denver Broncos' quest to eliminate all depth in their offensive backfield continues.

ESPN.com is reporting that the Broncos are close to an agreement with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers to trade backup quarterback Jake Plummer for a draft pick, potentially a fourth-rounder.

This would be a great move for Tampa Bay. Plummer doesn't give a team what they'd want out of a generic veteran-he doesn't avoid turnovers, and he's probably not the kind of guy you want giving advice to younger players. ("How come you never throw with your left hand, Bruce?") But he did go to a conference championship a year ago, and could have a few years left as a starter in the league. If the Buccaneers can get two years of solid quarterbacking for a second-day draft pick, that's a coup. And if Plummer doesn't pan out, the Bucs will barely miss the pick.

For the Broncos, I don't really like it. I suppose I can understand why it would be tough to keep Plummer around, especially at a starter's salary. But he wouldn't be much of a distraction-he's a team guy and, more importantly, he's not that popular with the fans. Jay Cutler would really have to be awful for there to be any public outcry for Plummer.

It does make sense to show Cutler and the rest of the players that the team has confidence in their young passer. But if Cutler-who'll only be in his second year, after all-struggles, what's Plan B? The Broncos still have time to sign a veteran backup; they just won't have time to find one better than Plummer.

Other NFL news

The Bell-Bly trade was just one of many interesting NFL moves today.

1. Steelers cut Joey Porter. For such a short article, it's heavy on great lines, like this one:

Over the past couple of days, Pittsburgh shopped Porter in trade discussions and there was some interest. In the end, the Steelers decided to give him the chance to find a new team instead of sending him somewhere he might not want to go.

Translation: they fired him. What a considerate organization! (I could be wrong, but doesn't it sound like John Clayton is just bending over backwards to compliment the Steelers here?) Besides, of course they couldn't trade him. Porter's good enough that his team would only go around offering him in a trade if they were about to cut him.

Porter and running back Verron Haynes were released Thursday as the Steelers got under the salary cap. But the decision to release Porter wasn't as much a cap move as it was a change in direction. A three-time Pro Bowl performer, Porter turns 30 on March 22. And with new coach Mike Tomlin taking over for Bill Cowher, the Steelers were looking to go in a different direction with their linebacking corps.

That direction? Slower. "We're looking to get less physical this year," Tomlin ought to have said.

Porter is one of the league's most outspoken players and is willing to verbally challenge opponents.

Yeah, I guess you could say that.

2. Cowboys cut Drew Bledsoe. The article mentioned that Bledsoe is seventh all-time in career passing yardage. Mostly, I just wanted to link to this list, which I promise will absolutely blow your mind. The lesson: some stats are more important than others. A lot more important.

3. Lorenzo Neal got a three year extension. He's thirty-five. Am I the only one who thinks that's a little long?

Tatum Bell, etc. for Dré Bly

The Denver Broncos have (probably) just acquired Detroit Lions cornerback Dré Bly, giving up only Tatum Bell, George Foster, and a draft pick. (Wait, that's three people.)

Bly is best known for his time as the nickelback for the early-century St. Louis Rams, one of the most wretched defenses of our era. (In the nadir that was their 2000 season, the Rams gave up 29.4 points per game.) On a dangerous team that competed solely and I mean solely, on the strength of a record-setting offense, Bly was one of the very best defensive bench players.

At first glance, it seems we gave up too much for the 29-year-old defender. But when you're sitting across the proverbial bargaining table from a genius like Matt Millen, you take what you can get.

This trade seems odd to me in terms of timing, but I like it more the more time I give it. To be fair, Bly is speedy and has a nose for interceptions. He's taken five of his thirty-three career picks in for touchdowns. Think of him like Terrell Buckley, or as a better version of Deltha O'Neal.

The Broncos gave up a bit in exchange. George Foster had managed to play his way to the bench in his brief and disappointing career. (Maybe that's too harsh-is it reasonable to expect a man who's only 6'5" and 338 pounds to be able to push people out of his way?)

The draft pick is probably going to be in the fifth round. Who knows if we'll miss it? Yes, a lot of very important players are drafted in or after the fifth round-Karl Mecklenburg went in the freaking twelfth round-but in 2006, the Broncos took guard Chris Kuper in the fifth round, you know? (No offense, Chris.)

Tatum Bell is a significant loss, though I'm sure he's also a constant frustration to Broncos coaches. On one hand, he rushed for more than one thousand yards last year and has a sparkling career average of 4.9 yards per carry. On the other, he combined Terrell Davis size (5'11", 213 lbs.) with Clinton Portis speed (4.34 in the 40) but could barely hold off the competition for the starting job. Plus he goes down just a little easier than other recent Broncos runners, and Mike Shanahan has a Hardaway-like tolerance for soft runners.

Of course, the reason we needed a cornerback was the tragic death of Darrent Williams. Williams was good, and clearly our best starting option alongside Champ Bailey, but Dominique Foxworth and Karl Paymah played all right when given a chance. I thought the Broncos needed depth at corner more than they necessarily needed to find a new starter, but Bly is a welcome addition at corner.

This trade, combined with the sad and recent passing of backup Damien Nash, leaves the Broncos very thin at running back. (It's especially worrisome considering the play of our offensive line this year.) Right now the Broncos' options are Mike Bell, Cedric Cobbs, and someone named Andre Hall. I guess Cecil Sapp could move back to tailback, too.

Since this trade has made running back such a question mark, I'm hesitant to pass a final judgement until the offseason plays its course. Assuming the Broncos find a runner before the season starts, it was probably a solid move. I think. You?